I think the “so and so is a bust” one year after being drafted is utterly premature (I’m thinking in particular of Brace and Chung).For sure there will be busts, but in the Patriots’ complex system, and in particular at very cognitively demanding positions (DB, DL, WR), it will just take time for young players to pick up the scheme.The two-gap, 3-4 Parcells/Belichick defense is a read and react defense for lineman, and is a significant change to the 4-3 gap penetration scheme Brace played in at BC.I’m not super knowledgeable on the 4-2 defense that Oregon runs, but I’m sure in my bones that the SS position in Belichick’s defense is more cognitively demanding than anything in the college system.

Middle linebacker is the easiest position in football to project: people like Jon Beason, Patrick Willis, Demeco Ryans, etc. all step in and make an immediate impact, and so often win Rookie of the Year, because they are asked to replicate the instinctive football play they’ve been doing.They certainly learn new things, but they don’t have the same learning curve of say, a 3-4 two gaper asked to change what he does—1 gap 4-3 lineman is a similar projection to middle LB, where you keep doing basically the same thing: be accountable for one lane and penetrate.

Keep in mind these kids are young, in or just ending adolescence as rookies, and as such are still growing and changing mentally.There’s a significant body of cognitive psychology research that shows how even into late adolescence, our executive function improves and grows.The executive function controls “selective attention, decision-making and response inhibition skills, along with the ability to carry out multiple tasks at once” (Blakemore & Choudhury, 2006).Do you think as a Pats’ SS or a 3-4 NT you have to develop “selective attention, decision-making and response inhibition skills, along with the ability to carry out multiple tasks at once?”

I see this all the time in my students at Carnegie Mellon University.As a whole, these are some of the smartest and most privileged young people in the world—they’re all smart.But my seniors and Masters students are much more able to pick up and demonstrate competency in complex cognitive tasks: the group from 22-26 demonstrates really different cognitive ability than the 18-21 group.I think this carries over to our rookies—I’m not surprised it might take someone like Chung or Brace a while in the system, but also time to have their brain/cognition mature, before they can handle it.

who is calling chung a bust? he is a safety who is behind alot of good players on the depth chart in a great set of safeties (merriweather=probowl, sanders=good player, mcgown=good, hard hitting) Brace i think will be converted to DE or used beside wilfork on running downs.

Every time I see someone write that Chung or Brace is a bust, I just laugh. You cannot expect a rookie who isn't a linebacker to come in and put up Pro Bowl numbers. Just look at Mario Williams, who everyone said was a bust after the first year. He is now one of the best DE in the league. Nnamdi Asomugha did not do much of anything his first 2-3 years, and is now one of the top two corners in the league. Young players need time to develop and mature into productive young men.

Decent read , but there are a couple mistakes here. Most people have no idea that there is 3 different types of the 3-4 D and the different schemes involved in it. The Chargers/Cowboys run a one gap and we run a two gap. We dont run the BB/Parcells 3-4 , we run a modified base of the Fairbanks-Bullough D...that was put in by BB. Regarding the S position , Its not correct to say that we play/have a traditional SS/FS. We only use them in name only because we use both S's interchangeably. For example , the Steelers use Troy Polamalu interchangeably , you'll see him coming up in the box and wrapping up Ray Rice behind the line of scrimmage and then pick off a 50 yard Kerry Collins Bomb a few plays later. The Pats dont have guys that just play FS or SS. And I havent heard anyone call Chung a bust. I think you can attribute his lack of playing time to the reasons I just gave and the complexity of the Pats D. Its just crazy and stupid I might add to call any player a bust that has only been in the league for a year or two.And the last point I want to make is more of an opinion than correction. I didnt really understand your second point about the M/ILB being the easiest to project. In the very next sentence you talked about how they come right in and make an impact , thats very different than projecting a players production coming from college and going to the pros. I think I get what your trying to say about projecting I/MLB's , but would argue that RB is the easier position to come out of college and make an impact. Plus you cant just look at stats for a M/ILB and think hes immediatly making a REAL impact. Every single I/MLB is going to have good stats after playing a full 16. The tackle stat in particular is extremely inflated in todays game. RB's will come out of college an tear up the league for 1300 yards and 10 TD's. Im definitely not saying its easy from a physical standpoint , not at all. But from a production standpoint I really dont think one can argue that any other position has an immediate impact. I hear you about the M/ILB position though , but just think it takes them a little longer to come along and be a game changer.And I have to take issue w/ NATESUBS assertion that Chung might not have got tons of run because we have " a great set of safeties " . LOL I think you might want to think about that statment again before saying that in public the next time. Listen Im a Meriweather fan , but calling him great or even calling part of a " great set of safeties ". IMHO Meriweather is behind in terms of his progression. Im not sure hes even a top ten S yet , yea he'll make a lot of plays that make you take notice of his skills , but he'll make just as many that make you scratch your head or put your g/f's head through the TV LOL...obviously just playing. Seriously though , I think the S position was a weakness last year. Again I like McGowan , but think he needs to be better and maybe it went unnoticed to some , but failed to make enough big plays and gave up a few too many. If that was his rookie season Id be fine , but I think hes as good as he'll get and we need better right now. Im hoping a few years under BB will bring the best out of him and then some. To the point that I was hoping we would somehow end up w/ "my boy" Earl Thomas. Who knows , hopefully they'll pick it up this year because we're going to need them to make a serious run at another ring.

I think the general consensus is that after 3 you should know or have a pretty good idea of what you have as a player. Very few are going to reach their peak and be superstar by that time , but you can say to yourself " we drafted this guy in this round , w/ this pick , and had these expectations and this is where we're at ".

i'm not really sure who has been going around calling chung a bust. i thought he looked like a promising rookie at a tough position when he got on the field. i expect he'll be the starter at SS this season (by week 6 at latest) and will be a good player for us. tough and a good leader, and will allow merry to play the true FS position which he is better suited for.

as for brace, i agree it is too early to call him a bust. BUT, he showed signs of being a bust last year, and no signs of being even a solid player. i agree that scheme is part of it, but dont forget that pryor was actually playing more of a different position and scheme here than he did in college and he VASTLY outplayed brace and looks like a promising player. the disappointing thing about brace and the reason that people are down on him was that the few times he got on the field he was playing nose on clear running downs. so basically all he had to do was hold the point of attack. and pretty much every time he got pushed back and run on and wilfork had to be quickly run back onto the field. so hopefully it was an issue of leverage or balance or conditioning or something that is correctable, but right now he hasnt done anything to show that he can play. so lets see what he can do this year.

and as for the people projecting him as a DE, i dont see it. not enough length to keep the guards off him and cover two gaps, and not enough (or any) explosion to push the pocket on passing downs. hopefully he can develop into a decent backup NT...i think thats probably the best we can hope for.

For those asking about who says Chung's a bust, I was thinking in particular of TexasPat3, who has said that like 55 times :) I've heard some other folks say that, but it's good to hear that's not the broad consensus.

We need to define bust. I'd say that term is limited to 1st rounders, but if you want to argue that 2nd-3rd rounders can be called busts if they don't pan out then I'd say ok, fine.

I wouldn't call Chung a bust, not even close. If he's not playing more this year and full time in year 3 I'd be surprised. I saw some flashes from him last year, and it's a steep learning curve in this defense. I wouldn't call Brace a bust either, he gets a year or two to become what he's gonna be, which could be a DE/NT rotation guy, and hopefully a competent one.

I think the clock is ticking on guys like Wheatley and Crable, as former 2nd-3rd rounders, to show that they can get past injuries and on the field to contribute. I'm tired of hearing that Wilhite is a bust. He's a 4th rounder for cripes sake, and he's played too much in the top 3, which isn't to say that he couldn't be a good nickel. If you want to extend the argument to Maroney, Watson, etc., and say they are busts, I'd say that both contributed to some pretty good Pats squads, which isn't effusive praise but it ain't like they stunk it up either.

I think some people around here think if a guy doesn't light it up immediately after being drafted in the first few rounds he's a bust.

Some people just like to criticize everything the team does. If the O line gives up one pressure all game, they get a "C" grade. If the defense gives up more than one TD, they get a D. Draft a player who runs a slow 40, BB gets a C.

Some of us are more reasonable and save the criticism for the guys who truly deserve it ... I'm looking at you Maryweather.

Bust what is the actual definition? Seems to me it's a pretty subjective and fluid determination. Again we are talking about symantics! Look because a player doesn't fit in a certain system or into a certain category of player doesn't make him a bust, but in each beholders eye he might be considered part of varying shades of the same word,bust. Look how can anyone call Wheatley or Crable a bust? Neither of them have been in uniform or on the field for any length of time,so determining whether either is a bust is not feasible. Like I always say about games it's not how you play in the beginning of the game it's the totallity of the game and it's outcome. To say someone underacheived is also a misnomer, because for someone too underacheived he would have first set a standard too acheive and in most of the cases we've talked about today have never established the aforementioned precedent. So in closing rather than rush to a judgement or a perceived notion,I think I'll wait for the final determination on the part of the Head Coach.

For those asking about who says Chung's a bust, I was thinking in particular of TexasPat3, who has said that like 55 times :) I've heard some other folks say that, but it's good to hear that's not the broad consensus.Posted by USMCM1A1

TexasPat is usually very optomistic but for some reason came out this year playing the devils advocate. Folks on this board were calling Brace a bust during the season last year! Can you imagine that? Chung has been called a bust by more than TP though. But I've heard more than one announcer get excited about Chung. What people forget is it took Polamalu three years to become Polamalu. People were calling him a bust as well. Seems stupid now, ya think? Ya gotta love hindsight.

Bust what is the actual definition? Seems to me it's a pretty subjective and fluid determination. Again we are talking about symantics! Look because a player doesn't fit in a certain system or into a certain category of player doesn't make him a bust, but in each beholders eye he might be considered part of varying shades of the same word,bust. Look how can anyone call Wheatley or Crable a bust? Neither of them have been in uniform or on the field for any length of time,so determining whether either is a bust is not feasible. Like I always say about games it's not how you play in the beginning of the game it's the totallity of the game and it's outcome. To say someone underacheived is also a misnomer, because for someone too underacheived he would have first set a standard too acheive and in most of the cases we've talked about today have never established the aforementioned precedent. So in closing rather than rush to a judgement or a perceived notion,I think I'll wait for the final determination on the part of the Head Coach.Posted by sportsbozo1

I can buy your argument about the "bust" label being pretty subjective and fluid, but to me, I think you look at a guy like Jamarcus Russell and you can call him a bust. He was drafted with the expectation of being a franchise-type quarterback and he was paid a lot of up front cash to be the guy to lead the Raiders for a decade. Instead, the Raiders are on the verge of cutting him and they had to trade another pick for Campbell to try and replace him.

Russell is the definition of a bust: a guy selected using a high draft pick (in his case, #1 overall), where there is a significant outlay of guaranteed dollars, and where he severely underachieves given the expectations of performance. Will he ever succeed somewhere else? Who knows, maybe he will salvage his career, but it's likely that he's not the second coming of Donovan McNabb or Dan Marino.

But getting back to Crable, Wheatley, Maroney, Watson et al. I think it's fair to say that the Pats were expecting Maroney to be a featured back and Watson to be a dual blocking and recieving threat, hence their selection as first rounders. Were/are either terrible? No, but both have been teases, and both have been serviceable, so hard to call them busts. How about Chad Jackson? First round talent, traded up to get him, glimpses of potential, but never put it together. Jackson = el busto.

Wheatley and Crable? If you're taking a chance to draft a guy in the 2nd and 3rd round, you probably think each will contribute in some aspect of the game, i.e. pass rush and nickel, plus special teams. Neither of these guys has. Are they busts? To date, yes, given where they were drafted. Will they ever transform into serviceable players? Why not? But if not here, where and when? So given where they were drafted and given their production to date, if neither produces this year then yes, they are busts.

In Response to Re: They Ain't Busts Yet : I can buy your argument about the "bust" label being pretty subjective and fluid, but to me, I think you look at a guy like Jamarcus Russell and you can call him a bust. He was drafted with the expectation of being a franchise-type quarterback and he was paid a lot of up front cash to be the guy to lead the Raiders for a decade. Instead, the Raiders are on the verge of cutting him and they had to trade another pick for Campbell to try and replace him. Russell is the definition of a bust: a guy selected using a high draft pick (in his case, #1 overall), where there is a significant outlay of guaranteed dollars, and where he severely underachieves given the expectations of performance. Will he ever succeed somewhere else? Who knows, maybe he will salvage his career, but it's likely that he's not the second coming of Donovan McNabb or Dan Marino. But getting back to Crable, Wheatley, Maroney, Watson et al. I think it's fair to say that the Pats were expecting Maroney to be a featured back and Watson to be a dual blocking and recieving threat, hence their selection as first rounders. Were/are either terrible? No, but both have been teases, and both have been serviceable, so hard to call them busts. How about Chad Jackson? First round talent, traded up to get him, glimpses of potential, but never put it together. Jackson = el busto. Wheatley and Crable? If you're taking a chance to draft a guy in the 2nd and 3rd round, you probably think each will contribute in some aspect of the game, i.e. pass rush and nickel, plus special teams. Neither of these guys has. Are they busts? To date, yes, given where they were drafted. Will they ever transform into serviceable players? Why not? But if not here, where and when? So given where they were drafted and given their production to date, if neither produces this year then yes, they are busts. Posted by BrooklineRob

I wouldn't even call Jawful Russell a bust because he's young enough that if he really wants to make it he will be given another opportunity,same can be said about Wheatley and Crable. As for Jackson he's getting another look up in Buffalo. Watson is back with a familiar face soo he might yet become what was originally envisioned. I don't try to prognasticate because is I could see into the future I'd pick the winning powerball numbers and retire into obscurity. I hope all of the players who enter into the NFL acheive a modicum of success just not when they play against the Patriots...LOL

This will be the year that they define themselves. The biggest improvements are said to be between year one and two, so we'll see if they can improve. I think Chung and Brace certainly have talent. Chung just looks like he loves to compete, I wish he were bigger, but I think he will develop into a very good player. I swear Brace was hurt last year and we did'nt hear about it, no way a guy that big gets blown off the ball that easily.

What hopefully separates Crable, Brace, and others from JaMarcus Russell is work ethic and character.

I'm assuming because they're still on the roster that the guys are still working hard to improve. By many accounts, Russell felt entitled and above everyone else in large part because he was handed the starting job and got a huge contract with $30mil+ guaranteed.

I wouldn't label anyone as a bust on the Patriots current roster. After this year, if several don't step up, yes, then i think you can put a few in that category. If this happens, I hope we move on and look to replace them.

I'm one of the biggest Chung fans. I think he will develop into a really good player, and I see him challenging to start this year. Those who say he is a bust are absolutely uninformed. As a rookie, playing the safety position, the guy had 37 tackles, 2 sacks, and 1 interception. Not too shabby. Give this guy serious playing time, and I think he will develop into one of the better safeties in the league.

He has the right attitude, is aggressive, is smart, plays physical, and is exactly what the defense needs at that position.

I'll say the same for Wheatley and Wilhite. Both players have show flashes of ability. I just hope Wheatley's wrist holds up.Posted by CubanPete

I can agree with you on Wilhite, but I can't say the same for Wheatley. Honestly, I can't even remember the last time I saw him on the field. I hope he can rebound and produce, but i'm not seeing it right now. I hope you're right and I just can't remember the plays...

Brace played against Buffalo in week 15. The defense held the Bufs to 3 points until late in the 4th quarter when they gave up a meaningless TD. Then Brace played Jax in week 16. The defense held the one-eyed Jacks to 0 points until late in the 4th quarter when they gave up a meaningless TD. Now if Brace wasn't doing his part, then the other 10 guys must have played two great games.

One of those 10 other players in the 35-7 Jacksonville game was Patrick Chung, so now we're talking about only 9 defensive players and they all had terrific games.

Or, it's possible that these two guys grew a bit in December. It's their more recent games that count.

Decent read , but there are a couple mistakes here. Most people have no idea that there is 3 different types of the 3-4 D and the different schemes involved in it. The Chargers/Cowboys run a one gap and we run a two gap. We dont run the BB/Parcells 3-4 , we run a modified base of the Fairbanks-Bullough D...that was put in by BB. Regarding the S position , Its not correct to say that we play/have a traditional SS/FS. We only use them in name only because we use both S's interchangeably. For example , the Steelers use Troy Polamalu interchangeably , you'll see him coming up in the box and wrapping up Ray Rice behind the line of scrimmage and then pick off a 50 yard Kerry Collins Bomb a few plays later. The Pats dont have guys that just play FS or SS. And I havent heard anyone call Chung a bust. I think you can attribute his lack of playing time to the reasons I just gave and the complexity of the Pats D. Its just crazy and stupid I might add to call any player a bust that has only been in the league for a year or two. And the last point I want to make is more of an opinion than correction. I didnt really understand your second point about the M/ILB being the easiest to project. In the very next sentence you talked about how they come right in and make an impact , thats very different than projecting a players production coming from college and going to the pros. I think I get what your trying to say about projecting I/MLB's , but would argue that RB is the easier position to come out of college and make an impact. Plus you cant just look at stats for a M/ILB and think hes immediatly making a REAL impact. Every single I/MLB is going to have good stats after playing a full 16. The tackle stat in particular is extremely inflated in todays game. RB's will come out of college an tear up the league for 1300 yards and 10 TD's. Im definitely not saying its easy from a physical standpoint , not at all. But from a production standpoint I really dont think one can argue that any other position has an immediate impact. I hear you about the M/ILB position though , but just think it takes them a little longer to come along and be a game changer. And I have to take issue w/ NATESUBS assertion that Chung might not have got tons of run because we have " a great set of safeties " . LOL I think you might want to think about that statment again before saying that in public the next time. Listen Im a Meriweather fan , but calling him great or even calling part of a " great set of safeties ". IMHO Meriweather is behind in terms of his progression. Im not sure hes even a top ten S yet , yea he'll make a lot of plays that make you take notice of his skills , but he'll make just as many that make you scratch your head or put your g/f's head through the TV LOL...obviously just playing. Seriously though , I think the S position was a weakness last year. Again I like McGowan , but think he needs to be better and maybe it went unnoticed to some , but failed to make enough big plays and gave up a few too many. If that was his rookie season Id be fine , but I think hes as good as he'll get and we need better right now. Im hoping a few years under BB will bring the best out of him and then some. To the point that I was hoping we would somehow end up w/ "my boy" Earl Thomas. Who knows , hopefully they'll pick it up this year because we're going to need them to make a serious run at another ring.Posted by ONE-TIME

Nice explanation of the 3-4!

The 3-4 was used in college, but came to the pros in 1974 with Chuck Fairbanks. He coached Oklahoma and the Patriots.

The "Bullough" variation of the "Fairbanks 3-4" is the system used by NE today. No team has returned to the original Fairbanks, and the classic 3-4 system is now just called Fairbanks-Bullough. It is strictly a 3-4 system, as is the Phillips 3-4.

The Fairbanks-Bullough

The Bum Phillips 3-4 one gap

The Lebeau Zone-Blitz - different DLs will often drop back into coverage, while several linebackers (and even defensive backs) blitz.

I agree calling 1st and 2nd years players bust- way too hasty a judgement. As for Chung, from the little of him I saw last year, I think he is going to be a really good player for the Pats. As for Brace, who really knows?